September 4, 2008
Posted: 825 GMT

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - It's been over a year since I've been in Pakistan.

For a long time I couldn't get a visa: my reporting on former President Musharraf's failed policies to take on the Taliban had apparently won me powerful enemies, Pakistani insiders told me. But that's all changed now.

The former military dictator is out of power and the new government says it wants to open its doors to all reporters. Political leadership isn't the only thing that's changed. When I was last here spring 2007 the Taliban were a growing problem in the border region, now they are much stronger and the government is waging an increasingly violent war against them.

When I pick up the daily news papers here the headlines are dominated by reports of pro-government tribes taking on the Taliban, government jets bombing Taliban hideouts. It was never this way before.

But lest I convey the wrong image here that the government is winning handily, senior officials tell me they are deeply concerned about progress in this fight. There is a feeling despite their efforts they are only treading water, not beating the Taliban. The big challenge they tell me is getting popular support for a war Musharraf only ever characterized as an extension of the U.S. war on terror. To win, officials tell me, they need to sell the message to Pakistanis, particularly those in the Afghan border region that this fight is their fight. That Pakistan is not blindly fighting the war on terror for the United States but is tackling a very real threat to its own stability and future.

Two ministers and a High Commissioner all told me nothing undermines those efforts more than U.S. air strikes in Pakistan. So when we started getting reports U.S. troops had come by helicopter and conducted a ground attack inside Pakistan it was clear reaction there would be an angry official reaction.

When the foreign minister issued a statement "strongly condemning the assault" calling it "unacceptable" a "gross violation of Pakistan's territory" and a "grave provocation" I was somewhat surprised when a retired Pakistani army general here told me the anger expressed could have been far greater.

He told me it was the first time he'd heard reports of U.S. ground troops in such an attack in Pakistan. It forced him, he said, to consider something most Pakistanis might find hard to swallow, perhaps the new government, eager to bolster their grip on power and secure U.S. support had signaled an increased willingness for U.S. troops to conduct cross-border operations. If it were true, he said, it's so sensitive it would never be announced. The government would always have plausible deniability.

I'm certainly not getting any hints of such a deal from officials, although they all convey with a very real passion an extreme dislike for the Taliban.

What's clear now I'm back in Pakistan: the dynamic is far more fluid than before I left, after all only today the prime minister's armored limo was shot up on a busy highway.

The stakes could not be higher, the government is still fragile, the Taliban getting stronger, I'm in no doubt any perceived mistakes by the new leaders will be exploited by their enemies, military and political. And that could directly impact the United States if what little gains have been achieved against the Taliban leech away as support for the government falls.

Everyone here is telling me now is the time for Pakistan, Afghanistan and the United States to accept this is a regional war, trust each other, work together, to defeat a common enemy.

What's worrying me, we've heard all this before, and I see little indication the compromises necessary to achieve such cooperation have even entered public dialogue, never mind won popular support, let alone still show any sign of implementation.

Posted by: ,
Filed under: General • Pakistan


Share this on:
sudheer mopperthy   September 4th, 2008 1048 GMT

After the recent general election and President‘s exit, Islamic terrorists have significantly increased their bombing attacks within Pakistan and in neighboring India and Afghanistan. Terrorist sympathizers with the Pakistani military and ISI wing continue to provide training, material, logistical supports and safe heaven to extreme terrorists. At the same time Saudi oil money, billions of which come from U.S. gasoline consumption, continues to promote Madrasas (extreme religious education) in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India among other countries, while the U.S. provides billions of dollars in military assistance supposedly to prevent terrorism and to hunt Bin Laden. I wish honestly Nic you visit the POK (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) or Azaad Kashmir so that you can report more facts there are more training camp there than in other areas of Pakistan.

Ramsi Hashash   September 4th, 2008 1152 GMT

This is maybe an old story but the truth from day one. I told friends when the US started their attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq years ago, that the US should forget about Iraq and make full assault on Afghanistan.
1. A full scale bombardment of the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan
2. Send Special Forces into the Pakistani side before the bombardment, across all known mountain trails between the two countries and most of those trails are known. These Special Forces could have eliminated, caught etc 90% of the Taliban and Al Qaeda leadership if done right.
3. After the bombardment send in a massive force, the one they sent to Iraq which should have gone to Afghanistan. This massive force needs than to control the boarders and the remote areas of Afghanistan not the cities etc.
4. So basically they should have done exactly the opposite which the Russian army did.

Since they did not do all this the result is as follows. In comparison to Iraq the US troops have lost the same percentage of troops in Afghanistan as they have in Iraq if you use percentage of troops on the ground. And the loss of US lives is increasing.
On the other side of the mountain in Pakistan the US have now more enemies than they had before and they have a great breeding ground.
Why did Musharraf not approach the Taliban/Al Qaeda situation in his country with more military strength? Well simple the Pakistani military is not capable of taking on the "terrorists".
The new government has no choice but to allow US troops unofficially to entre Pakistan and take out the biggest pockets of resistance. After that the Pakistani army can take care of the rest.

By the way if I am not mistake for years Obama mentioned that Afghanistan should be our focus, but what does someone like Obama know, he was not even in the military. Ah but he might understand world politics and local issues better than some of those politicians who have a military career but no results to show for.

Yes it is true that the new Pakistani government has to make a balancing act in explaining their most traditional religious citizens that tradition and religion is good and a major pillar of the Pakistani society but that the Taliban and especially Al Qaeda is not what Pakistan stands for.

This is going to get ugly but is necessary for the good of the majority of the people in the whole region.

DPKraemer   September 4th, 2008 2237 GMT

Let's not overlook the obvious here. Why are we launching a major strike NOW? Because a big win in Afghanistan and/or getting Bin Laden, will secure the Republicans for the next 4-8 years. It's outright devious and self-serving to have waited until the time was right for their party, instead of doing what was right for the American people. And wait, he probably prayed on that decision, too.

Robert Aleksiunas   September 5th, 2008 727 GMT

US Missiles at Russia's Doorstep

One item, which may have more serious consequences on international and the United States security than Iraq or Afghanistan, is the subject of stationing US missiles and radar systems on Russia’s doorstep, which in effect is tantamount of Russia stationing its missiles in Cuba or Venezuela. How would we react to such action? We already see the increase in tensions between the Western nations and Russia, and Russia’s behavior in the Republic of Georgia. In view of our own behavior, can we really blame Russia for theirs? Yet, there is a total absence in our media, political debates, or where the presidential candidates stand on this important subject.

I believe that the American public is either not knowledgeable or not interested on the missile issue. So where is the media, where is CNN to educate the public? Where are the Gallup pollsters?

I would really like to know. We do not need another arms race or a new cold war. My vote for president will not be based so much on abortion or gay rights, and although those are also important subjects, they would not have impact on our overall security, one way or another. My vote will be based on where the candidates stand on the missile issue. The difference in their stand on this subject would mean the difference in more or less secure United States.

Majid Khan (Lahore - Pakistan)   September 5th, 2008 915 GMT

Ramsi, r u out of ur mind?................sugguesting a full scale carpet bombing on a very large mountaineous area comprising a large papulataion, do u have any idea how many innocents would die if this happens.............insane idea from an insane person to an insane & cruel Nation

Jami   September 5th, 2008 1155 GMT

Those who thinks for a malitary solution to end Taliban lives in a fools paradise. It is their land and their home ground and one day those fighting here have to go back.
Lets us be honest , the fight is for capturing world resources. In Iraq there were no terrorists and no WMD but still the world was mislead.
If we want to save this world we have to adhere to honesty of our conscience and not the propaganda with wicked intentions behind.

Ramsi Hashash   September 6th, 2008 152 GMT

Majid,
I suggest nothing else than what the US did before the send ground troops to Afghanistan. I was not suggesting to do this on the Pakistani side, but suggesting that after the carpet bombings which did happen, the US should have sent their 150000 troops to Afghanistan not Iraq. At the same time specail forces could have cut of the escape passes into Pakistan.

Jami, nobody suggests that any miliatry intervention would have gotten ride of the Taliban, but they certainly would have had a better chance to get the top leaders of Al Qaeda and the Taliban if they would have done it in this way.

The result as it stands no, is that the US has made more enemys in Afghanistand and Pakistan and that will hurt them in the long run.

Jami, of course there where no WMDs in Iraq that was clear long before the US invaded. But right now we are talking about the troubles in the Afghan / Pakistan region.

I am also fully aware that the Taliban are a sold part of some regions in Pakistan, so obviously you will never be able to get rid of them.

Ramsi Hashash   September 6th, 2008 241 GMT

Majid,
Let us talk about Pakistan, how will Pakistan in the future deal with their provinces at the Afghan border? Let us forget about the US etc. Obviously those regions are run more by the tribal culture than through goverment authorities. Lahore and Karachi are not Waziristan so how if at all would you suggest the goverment of Pakistan to approach bringing the future in to this remote regions?
I for myself believe that time is the only real solution, but the question is does Pakistan have the time?

NS   September 6th, 2008 905 GMT

Zardaristan is a far more dangerous place to live in than even Talibanistan. In a world hungry for oil our geography has doomed us and now to make matters worse we have thieves as leaders. Our nation is up for sale and we can do nothing but watch. Watch as we our told that every location that is necessary for the US to secure as a base for its connectivity to Central Asia and the oil in the Middle East is the breeding ground for Al Qaeda?!! We are on the road to nowhere and people like Zardari are only going to make the journey longer and more painful than ever. God bless Pakistan.

Raja   September 6th, 2008 1121 GMT

1 thing which annoys me most about americans,Israelis,Britishers etc(muslim blood thirsty nations) is that they sit on computer whole day writing insane comments against Islam and Islamic countries.They openely suggest the ways to kill innocent people in the name of war on terror.Well they have tried all their ways but Islam is spreading at lightening speed.Good thing is west is getting humilating defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan despite all the military technology they have.All they can do is to kill innocent people with UMV machines and aerial strikes.They cant and will never face freedom gighters in open feild.I wish Iraqis and Afghanis get freedom from american terrorism soon.Do not spill human blood in the name of war on terror.Let humanity live.

M Khan   September 6th, 2008 1539 GMT

America is using any excuse they can to hurt muslims they don't care how many they kill, childern and woman doesn't matter and rest of the world is blind folded.
America don't and can not diffentiate between taliban and local citizen and the war is getting very unpopular in the region and will not get local support at all incoming days. "killing of inacent civilians " is like taget practice for US and allied forces in Pak-Afghan border. Soon allied will have to with draw or start another propoganda to stay in course. "No free hand to kill any one US forces it must end" American people are mislead and war is doing good to the 1 community only.
American must wake up not to let take advantage of their blood and money. Say no before too late.

Ramsi Hashash   September 7th, 2008 1219 GMT

Raja,
To a certain extend I understand you and also agree with you, but one thing we Muslims and I would like to include the Arabs (which are multi religious).
It is time that we stop blaming other and do our own things. Get our nations straightened out. Tradition, culture and religion are not a problem in modern society. So what does it take to get 80% of the Islamic/Arabic world out of the past and into the future?
Who cares whose soldiers or freedom fighters are better than the other one? It will get us no where?
You want to beat the West specifically the countries you mentioned? Go ahead and help educate your fellow brothers and sister, lead them to the future which obviously should and must include our heritage, and religion. We need to look forward no backwards. God never asked us to stay on the level where we are and put our head in the sand. He wants us to excel, to improve without forgetting him.

Education, economy etc should be our weapons, but are we really so different than those who we blame for our situation?

Marnie Tunay   September 7th, 2008 1852 GMT

Thanks for this update, Nic, I found it informative. I hope to hear more from you on this issue, which I am following closely. I really appreciate your succinct writing style, as, like most readers, I am short on time; but I want to stay informed. I have book-marked your blog.
Marnie Tunay
http://fakirscanada.googlepages.com/
http://fakirscanada.spaces.live.com/?lc=1033

Majid Khan (Lahore - Pakistan)   September 8th, 2008 845 GMT

Rasmi
i dont know where u live...........Pakistan or abroad (or even if u r a paksitani)............n have any idea about the culture & life about the people living in northern areas of Pakistan...........but let me tell u one thing, the only way to bring peace in this region is a TWO step process:

1) US forces (or NATO).....one the same thing...........should leave the area unconditionally IMMEDIATELY

2) Pakistan & Afghanistan Governments should involve local population to bring peace in the region as it was a practice centuries ago

The policy of "enforced peace" using American Gun wont help the issue..............Pashtoons live in this area n they will live here for good, so let them handle the issue by themselves with "backdoor" diplomatic help by the respective Governments of Pakistan & Afghanistan backed by, although not desired, US.

Any other solution will bring more instability, deaths of innocents and more rage against US, Pakistan & Afghnaistan Governments.

Leave Your Comment


 

Comments are moderated by CNN, in accordance with the CNN Comment Policy, and may not appear on this blog until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.


subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

Hear from CNN reporters across the globe. "In the Field" is a unique blog that will let you share the thoughts and observations of CNN's award-winning international journalists from their far-flung bureaus or on assignment. Whether it's from conflict zone, a summit gathering, or the path least traveled, "In the Field" gives you a personal, front row seat to CNN's global newsgathering team.

Follow us on Twitter

Follow CNNInTheField on TwitterGet In The Field updates when they appear online via the Web, SMS, or instant messages.

Follow CNNInTheField

From our Partners
Categories
Powered by WordPress.com VIP